In a slightly unexpected move, instead of the originally proposed Budget Workshop #2, we have a combination of the workshop and an added special board meeting.
it appears that there have been a couple of resignations in preparation for this special meeting -- Trustee Doug Ulrich and Treasurer Berman.
With the fact that the days of this president's term are fast coming to a close, we need to remember that these are last ditch meetings appear to be an effort to either try to set the future board up to fail or undermine the call for change.
AGENDA ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION
1. Village President’s Appointment of Janet Barron as Village Trustee for the Remaining Term of Office of Former Trustee Doug Ulrich
2. Motion to Approve of, and to Provide and Grant Advice and Consent to, President’s Appointment of Janet Barron as Trustee for Former Trustee Ulrich’s Remaining Term of Office
3. Swearing in of Janet Barron as Village Trustee
Congratulations to Janet Barron on her future appointment. I've mentioned many times my willingness to work with the existing board and I hope that Ms. Barron is more willing to work with the entire board than the Trustee whose seat she's getting. I do know that she's worked to get the incumbents of Lake Zurich re-elected and I believe that she was behind the barely updated Facebook page promoting Phil's re-election campaign.
It should also be noted that Ms. Baron is the spouse of one of the newly appointed P&Z Commission members, Sheldon Smith. I have concerns about conflicts of interest and as I highly opposed Treasurer Berman and Trustee Berman -- I would much prefer if we spread the public service across more families than consolidating with married couples.
4. New Roll Call if Needed to Establish a Quorum with newly seated Village Trustee
5. Budget Workshop #1 continued (not to exceed 30 minutes)
So -- instead of the normal Workshop #2, we get a quick review of the budget, likely without any questions -- by either the sitting or incoming trustees. At this point, I have many concerns about the budget for FY'22, but as questions will be refused, I’ll hold them until sworn in and full budget review can be conducted.
If you are following along and need an updated Excel of the amendments and budget -- here's the excel I've been working from.
6. Public Comments (not to exceed 30 minutes as an item)
7. Motion to Approve FY21 Budget Amendment #1
If this current board is paying any attention, they should not approve these amendments for 2 reasons:
There is no point. The money has already been spent without regard to the budget and so the only reason to amend it at this point is to try to make the audit appear that the CAO/Finance Director/Budget Officer was paying attention to the budget during the year.
The amendments do not cover the spending as of 4/12/2021. So, as part of the transition we got the most recent revenue/expenditure report -- which I understand is still missing any of the end of month reconciliations beyond December. I show that the amendments do not cover $144K of spending that ALREADY occurred by 4/12. One of the most telling is a $75K over budget amendment for Salaries - Regular
What this means is that if I run the numbers and adjust the amendments to include spending the is currently not covered by the proposed amendments for three of the funds with the biggest differences it looks like this:
The green text is directly from the audit -- and yes, I realize the math doesn't work to the Ending fund balance -- I'm guessing it's because I don't have the final post audit Revenue/Expenditure report for FY'20 -- and I think in the case of LWU capital improvements -- there's a transfer to reserves that's not seen here.
But here's what I think is most telling. If you take all the funds and add the gains and losses this is how each of these views of our finances look. You'd read this that the 4/9/21 YTD, we show we are adding cash of $480,118 and the proposed amendments show we will gain $89K -- however, if you adjust the amendment to at least cover the already booked expenses we will lose $35K. This is just cash within the fiscal year -- so, those red numbers reduce our reserves. The budget is such a loss because of the big expense of rehabbing well #5 planned in FY'22.
So -- net/net -- the amendments are not enough to show the true picture of our finances.
8. Motion to Accept an Offer to Purchase RedTail Lot #16 for $18,100
9. Motion Authorizing Chief Administrative Officer to Execute a Contract for the Purchase for RedTail Lot #16 for $18,100 and to take such other actions as are necessary to complete the sale in accordance with the terms of the Contract
10. Motion to Accept an Offer to Purchase RedTail Lot #17 for $18,100
11.Motion Authorizing Chief Administrative Officer to Execute a Contract for the Purchase of RedTail Lot #17 for $18,100 and to take such other actions as are necessary to complete the sale in accordance with the terms of the Contract
This confuses me. In 2017, we have a village ordinance that states that we will not accept less than 80% of the appraised value for these lots. These lots show that our CAO is attempting to sell these two lots for 56% of the appraised value. How?
Here's the key portion of the ordinance:
Based on this, both of these lots should be sold no less than $24,713. How is it possible for this board to ignore an ordinance of this village?
12. Motion to Approve Commendation and Performance Bonus for Kenny Goodwin in the amount of $15,000
13. Motion to Approve Commendation and Performance Bonus for Jim Rafferty in the amount of $10,000
Congratulations to both Kenny and Jim.